Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 18 Feb 1997

Vol. 475 No. 1

Private Members' Business - Prisons Bill, 1997: Second Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Before this debate adjourned I expressed my cynicism about this Bill. For the last 15 years I have listened to similar motions from every party including my own. What is the result? Opposition parties have all the answers until they go into Government, when they somehow become totally inept. Accordingly, I look on this motion of the Progressive Democrats as being motivated by opportunism. This is not to say there is no problem. The biggest problem confronting citizens is the lack of law and order. We have never had it so good economically but rural and urban populations are being gripped by a fear of the escalating crime problem. My views on crime and law and order are well known. They are not respected in the Dáil but I know from the volume of letters I receive that they are fairly well endorsed by the man in the street. During the early days of my career as a Deputy I was given the title "hang 'em flog 'em". That might have been somewhat unkind but I still favour very strong measures to curtail crime.

Many of the more intellectual Deputies have failed to recognise a criminal element in our society. Our system of law and order needs to be radically overhauled, while the prison system needs to be radically reappraised. One of the major problems is that the Department of Justice, which is responsible for prisons and many aspects of law and order, is run by civil servants all of whom could pass written examinations until the cows come home but many of whom know less than a boy scout or girl guide about the level of crime on the streets. The Garda Síochána is a virtual bystander in terms of many of the key elements of dealing with law and order and crime.

Deputy O'Donoghue, a technical law man, makes very entertaining contributions. In regard to the murder of Veronica Guerin he said there is not a democracy on earth which would not be abhorred that this could happen within its jurisdiction. While this is true, it also applies to the dreadful murder of the General, the biggest gangster this country has ever produced, during a time when Fianna Fáil was in power. I do not know if anyone was ever questioned about that murder. The same horror and rejection of crime was evident in 1994 when Fianna Fáil was in power and the attempts by that party to somehow blame the Minister for the crime problem are ludicrous.

The problem of crime will never be properly tackled in this Chamber because of its confrontational nature; one has all the answers in Opposition but one does not have the answers in Government. In time to come Deputy O'Donoghue will probably be a future Minister for Justice and will be subjected to the same fault finding as he and Deputy O'Donnell have engaged in against the Minister.

Everyone accepts the need for a prison building programme, which successive Governments have failed to introduce. We are told that Mountjoy Prison is awash with drugs. Deputy McDowell said that many prisoners in Mountjoy Prison run up overdrafts with crime bosses of between £5,000 and £7,000 and after their release they must pay for the gear they consumed in prison. This is a sad statement and if it is true, which it probably is, it clearly indicates that the situation in Mountjoy Prison is out of control.

During a previous debate Deputy O'Malley referred to a young man who had never taken drugs before he entered Mountjoy but who left prison a drug addict. This is a shocking indictment of life in this prison. The only way drugs can be brought into the prison is by the public or the wardens. Mountjoy Prison should be closed to the public so that hardened criminals are not allowed to see their families. It is very sad to think that a young man who never took drugs could leave prison a drug addict.

The Minister for Justice, Deputy Owen, has not solved the crime problem and neither will her successor, whoever he or she may be. I say this because of our stereotype approach to dealing with crime and the bleeding hearts and others who believe in the concept of rehabilitation in the prison system. We read in the newspapers every day about the hundreds, if not thousands, of hardened criminals who have been convicted 15, 20 and 25 times and for whom rehabilitation is absolutely pointless. It is not on the agenda. We must turn back the clock and reinstate a penitential system which will make prison life so difficult that, on their release, hardened criminals will make a conscious decision not to return.

Many people believe that prison is a sort of holiday or leisure camp. When I visited Loughan House some years ago during an autumn afternoon what I saw resembled life on a university campus with young men playing golf and listening to the radio. If Departments and politicians do not adopt a tough attitude to criminals we will be engulfed by crime. When society is so concerned about the welfare of prisoners that it establishes a prisoners' rights group then there is something seriously wrong. When one considers that a nutritionist has been appointed to Mountjoy Prison and the menu is changed every two weeks it is little wonder that many people choose to remain hardened criminals and stay there.

Is it agreed that Deputies Callely and Molloy share time? Agreed.

I welcome the opportunity to participate in this debate and congratulate the Progressive Democrats on introducing this Bill. I listened with interest to the last Government backbencher who is outraged by what is happening within the prison system. Will Deputy McGahon repeat what he said tonight at the Fine Gael parliamentary party meeting tomorrow? Perhaps then he will avail of another opportunity in the House to indicate the type of approach his party has agreed on the prison system. I am amazed that Deputy McGahon and other Government backbenchers expressed surprise as the prison system debate has developed. The scandalous situation that has been allowed develop over recent years was addressed only after the gruesome and horrible murders of Detective Garda Gerry McCabe and journalist Veronica Guerin, a very good and dear friend of mine. I regret the escalation of crime and the abuse of our prison system. However, it was only when these deaths occurred that the Minister addressed the issue.

What did the Fianna Fáil Minister do in the early 1990s?

That is the record Deputy McGahon and his party can proudly point to. I hope no other party, Minister or Government backbencher will ever be proud to stand up and say "that is our record" or ask "what did your Minister do?"

What did he do?

Sadly, the Government has failed to address a very serious matter. Many Members have been concerned about the prison system for a long time. It is well known that the Minister for Justice had much of her brief taken away because she is seen as a weak link in the Cabinet chain. She also received a major body blow some time ago when she missed a Cabinet meeting at which a proposal by the previous Government on Castlerea Prison was put on ice. Now the Government boasts about prison proposals and how it will do this and that.

Over the past two years it cancelled the prison programmes in place and failed to take action in other prisons. When I raised this matter two years ago I was told the space was being utilised, etc. On 20 November 1996 I asked the Minister the progress, if any, made regarding the use of part of the Curragh Military Barracks, County Kildare, as a place of detention, the time schedule involved and whether she would make a statement on the matter. I was aware that the Minister could take possession but could not occupy what were seen to be appropriate places for detention. The Minister replied:

Construction works for the new Curragh Prison have just been completed. Fit-out is under way and I will be taking possession of the new prison on Monday next, 25 November.

She went on to indicate the prisoners would be in situ, etc. November and December passed by and there were no prisoners in the new Curragh Prison. Since then, the Minister has presided over and granted temporary releases to known hardened criminals.

Was that unheard of when Fianna Fáil was in office? It does not matter who is in office; it is the system.

The Minister has failed to address what has been going on in the D wing of Mountjoy Prison. Eighteen places have been vacant for the past two years.

I would welcome the opportunity to put on record all the Minister's replies to my questions on prison matters but, unfortunately, I do not have time. Regarding the Curragh Prison, the Minister replied that 35 prisoners were accommodated there on 28 January 1997, but it has capacity to accommodate 68. If anybody is satisfied that 35 places out of 68 have been utilised, they are not on my side of the fence.

On 28 January 1997 I asked the Minister for Justice the total number of prisoners who availed of early releases. I refer to Deputy O'Donnell's comment that it was 50 per day. The Minister's response was:

Approximately 4,500 short-term temporary releases were granted in 1996 with approximately 4,000 receiving full temporary releases.

What a disgrace.

A number of Deputies referred to special arrangements for prisoners. I have asked questions on this matter in the past and was shocked by the responses I received. I asked the Minister questions on the cost and type of clothing available to prisoners and whether she had any views on the use of prison uniforms. The total cost of issuing standard clothing in 1995 was £540,000. The Minister indicated she had no plans to introduce a standard prison uniform. I do not see any problem with a standard prison uniform.

Recreational facilities are available to prisoners but not to law abiding citizens. I asked the Minister the type of facilities available to them. She was happy to indicate that physical education teachers, showers and changing rooms and all types of indoor and outdoor facilities on either an individual or group basis are available to criminals. Other facilities include a supervised gymnasium, television and video, indoor activities such as pool, table tennis and board games and limited library facilities. Inmates are also encouraged to avail of educational programmes. Recent initiatives include swimming lessons on a weekly basis and an outdoor pursuits programme involving canoeing, hillwalking, orienteering, rock climbing and sailing.

Recently it was brought to my attention that prisoners can avail of telephone facilities and the destination or duration of the call does not matter. I asked the Minister about this. The Minister of State and the Government backbencher may laugh, but it is wrong that these facilities are made available to convicted criminals but not to ordinary, law-abiding citizens.

It was brought to my attention recently that telephone facilities are available to prisoners. They can make a local or trunk call, or call a mobile phone, without time restrictions. In reply to a question tabled by me on this matter, the Minister for Justice stated:

Subject to the maintenance of safe custody, good order and security, and where practicable, a Governor may make arrangements by which a prisoner may communicate by telephone with members of his or her family or with legal advisers. The provision of free telephone calls is at the discretion of local management.

I asked about the cost of these facilities to the taxpayer but the reply stated: "Due to the nature of telephone billing in the prisons it is not feasible to accurately state the cost of telephone calls by prisoners".

I tabled another question to the Minister recently on library facilities available to prisoners. In her reply, she listed a number of journals that are available to prisoners. The reply stated:

The following is a list of the newspapers and magazines which were provided during 1995:

Irish Times, Irish Independent, Irish Press, Daily Mirror, The Star, English Independent, The Guardian, Cork Examiner, Evening Herald, Anois, Sunday Independent, Sunday Press, Sunday Tribune, Sunday World, RTE Guide, Radio Times, TV Times, Computer Magazine, Computer Scope, Technology Ireland, Woodworker Monthly, Health and Fitness, Ultra Fit, Smash Hits, Woman's Way, '19', Ireland's Eye, Ireland's Own, Amateur Photography, Hogan Stand, Farmer's Journal, Practical Photography, Treasure of the Earth, Garden and Answers, Dandy and the Beano.

Deputy O'Donoghue will change that.

That is an indication that there is something seriously wrong with our prison system, and I will not stand over the provision of such facilities to convicted criminals. We must have an independent prison authority with appropriate terms of reference to meet the needs in this area.

I circulated a newsletter to my constituents recently which made reference to a survey I conducted on crime in Dublin North Central, the response to which echoed my views. In the newsletter I stated:

It is time to take the gloves off and put the boot in — radical measures are necessary—

Resources must be provided to combat the problem of drugs and drug related crimes.

The whole area of sentencing, early release, required number of prison places and bail must be toughened.

An increase in the Garda presence on city streets, in our residential areas and support services must be visible.

Development of the community policing approach, communities working with the gardaí, neighbourhood watch programme and liaison committees to assist in the prevention of crime.

Introduce legislation to adequately update and improve our laws.

Introduce whatever special measures are necessary to deal with the escalation of crime.

The most important right of men and women in a free society is to be able to live in peace and security, protected by the law from personal harm in public places and in their homes. That right is under serious threat not only in Dublin but throughout the country. People no longer feel safe in their own homes. They cannot go freely about their normal business. They live in a constant state of anxiety and security consciousness. We face a crisis that must be confronted. Hardened criminals are walking the streets. We need additional places of detention for prisoners, from juveniles to hardened criminals. They are not available and I plead with the Minister to do something about the problem.

The Progressive Democrats brought this Bill before the House because we believe the prison system is in chaos. In a democratic society the prison service has a vital role to play in combating crime and in protecting the citizen. Along with the courts and the police, it is one of the three legs on which our system of law and order stands. Failure in any one of these areas threatens the whole structure.

In Ireland, the failings of our prison system are obvious. Every year, 4,000 orders are made for the early release of prisoners who have not completed their sentences and a further 4,500 orders are made for temporary release. Illegal drugs are widely available within the system and this serves to undermine the whole prison regime. The commitment to the education and rehabilitation of offenders is inadequate and the overall effort is weakened by the ready availability of drugs. The prison system cannot be expected to solve all our crime problems. Without a properly functioning prison system, however, any effort to tackle crime will be doomed to failure.

There are also major problems with regard to the public accountability of our prison system. Nobody knows the people who run the prison system. There has not been any analysis of the efficiency and effectiveness of the service. There are no set indicators against which management performance can be assessed. Annual reports are published so late as to be meaningless.

Serious questions arise about the strategic management of the service. The service has clearly failed to respond to the sharp increase in serious crime that has taken place in recent years and has been slow to respond to the changing nature of crime, particularly the impact of drugs abuse.

A complete reform of the present structure of the prison service must be an essential part of any new crime control policy. Remedial action is urgently required if we are to get the prison service working smoothly again. A major programme of reforms is needed, the key objectives of which should be to deliver improved management, efficiency, accountability and standards of prisoner welfare and rehabilitation. It is unlikely, however, that these objectives will be achieved while the prison service remains as an administrative branch of the Civil Service within the Department of Justice.

This Bill proposes the establishment of a separate executive to manage the prison service. We are proposing two policy initiatives in this area. The prison service should be converted into an autonomous executive agency independent of the Department of Justice. The head of the service would be directly accountable to the Oireachtas Select Committee on Legislation and Security. The Minister for Justice would continue to hold responsibility for overall prisons policy. There should be a much greater role for the private sector in the construction and maintenance of prison buildings and in the provision of ancillary services to prisons. Both these measures would be radical in the Irish context. Each has been recommended in reports published by the Government but we await legislation.

The document on public service reform Delivering Better Government advocated the delegation of certain tasks to executive agencies. The prison service would be an ideal candidate for agency status and this administrative model is widely used by prison services in other countries. Equally, the recent Forfás report Shaping our Future recommended that private sector provision of public infrastructure be considered in the area of transport. There is no reason this logic should not be extended to security infrastructure.

It is valid to pose the question: is the prison service providing value for money? The answer is almost certainly not. While the Government did not carry out a management review of the service or conduct any study of its efficiency and effectiveness, an examination of the facts would lead one to the conclusion that taxpayers are getting a poor return on their considerable investment.

Several factors should lead us to question the performance of the prison service. The average cost of keeping a person in prison is very high by international standards. While spending on prisons has risen by 46 per cent over the past five years, the number of prisoners has risen by only 8 per cent over the same period. The service has managed to spend £40 million in capital investment over the past five years without delivering any increase in capacity. In other words, the Department of Justice has spent the equivalent of the cost of a new prison but has nothing to show for it in terms of increased accommodation. In addition, £53 million was spent in overtime over the past three years. That is not the kind of record that inspires confidence and it highlights the need for major changes in the management of the system.

Imprisonment is an expensive option, but we must also recognise that there can be major costs attached to not imprisoning people who pose a danger to society. Despite reported instances of serious crime committed by people on unsupervised early release, there are no official statistics available on the number of such crimes. Apart from the personal suffering involved, these crimes impose huge costs on society in terms of legal and medical expenses, damage to property and cash loss. This highlights that our failure to provide an adequate level of prison accommodation has been an expensive mistake.

The Department of Justice is responsible for the provision of new prison accommodation. In association with the Office of Public Works, it has direct management control over all capital projects in the prisons service. All the evidence suggests the Department is not equipped to fill the role of project manager for large-scale capital investments. There is reason to believe that several million pounds have been wasted on badly planned prison projects in recent years. Press reports on the prisons system have listed a long catalogue of disasters. Some £1.5 million was spent on a new kitchen for Mountjoy, but as serving facilities were not provided it remained idle for many years. A sum of £4 million was spent on a medical centre for Mountjoy, but this was damaged by fire and prisoners are still escorted to outside hospitals at great expense. A total of £2.5 million was spent on a new women's unit at Mountjoy which was subsequently found to be unsuitable for housing female prisoners. Maintenance costs at Wheatfield — the most modern prison in Ireland — are reputedly higher than for the 11 other prisons combined. There have also been major problems with the installation of computerised payroll systems and modern electronic technology. In the circumstances it is not surprising that providing new prison accommodation is very expensive.

The Minister for Justice recently indicated that the cost of building the planned new prison at Wheatfield will be approximately £40 million. As the facility is to cater for 400 inmates this implies a cost of £100,000 per space. Surely it is unacceptable that the cost of providing basic accommodation for one individual in a medium security institution is equivalent to the cost of two family homes. The unnecessarily high cost of providing new spaces is hampering the essential development and expansion of the prisons system. Prison accommodation could be provided much more cheaply if we approached it correctly. We should adopt a cost-effective approach to the construction of new prisons.

The rehabilitation of offenders must be a key objective of a prisons system. Prison serves a number of important purposes. It punishes offenders for their crimes by depriving them of their liberty. It keeps them off the streets for lengthy periods, thereby preventing them from committing further crimes, and the unpleasant experience of prison can serve to deter inmates from reoffending. It is important also, however, that prisoners are treated with dignity and afforded an opportunity to rehabilitate into normal society. This is desirable in utilitarian as well as humanitarian terms. If the prisons system helped turn people away from a life of crime or drugs, the benefits to society would be enormous.

As a first step the Government should implement a proper system of committal assessment for incoming prisoners. This would enable prisoners with particular problems, whether violence, drug dependency or mental instability, to be identified at an early stage and minimise the disruption such individuals can cause to the system. Our prisons service should embark on a systematic programme to improve facilities for prisoners in several key areas. We must aim for single cell occupancy and an end to the practice of doubling up two prisoners to a cell. In Mountjoy up to five inmates can share a cell. The practice of slopping out must be phased out completely. The target must be to achieve a 100 per cent in-cell sanitation system. There should be strong emphasis on the provision of educational services to prisoners as a means of self-improvement in social and economic terms. Prisoners without employment skills should be given appropriate training to give them some chance of finding employment on their release. They should have an opportunity to work if they wish. We cannot allow people to exchange a life of idleness outside prison gates for a life of idleness inside them. Prisoners should be entitled to the same basic level of health services as the rest of the community.

Several investigations and reviews have revealed major shortcomings in the financial management of the prisons service. The Comptroller and Auditor General, the Garda Fraud Squad and internal studies carried out by the Department of Justice have identified serious problems in the system, such as obsolete financial regulations, inadequate internal controls and failure to maintain proper records and accounts. The current arrangements are inadequate. Major improvements are required in the financial management of the prisons service. The best way to achieve such improvements is to establish the service as an autonomous executive agency, as proposed by the Progressive Democrats' Bill which I commend to the House.

I wish to share time with Deputies Kemmy, Crawford and Eamon Walsh.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am sure that is agreed.

For the past week or two the yin of the Progressive Democrats Party has been in the ascendant. The caring and concerned profile is being presented to the electorate. It is falling over with concern for young people, drug addicts, rural dwellers and probably for anyone else who wants to put in an appearance. The Yang has been muzzled for the time being, but let no one be under an illusion — this is just a temporary phenomenon. The Yang will be let loose again and we will hear the clarion call for reductions in public expenditure, etc. It will be accompanied by the muffled sounds of more money for rural water supplies and for disadvantaged youth. It will operate on the assumption that "ne'er the twain shall meet" and, more importantly, that nobody will notice the inconsistency.

Why is the Minister of State not dealing with the contents of the Bill?

Speaking on the Children Bill last week, Deputy O'Donnell said that an "effective juvenile justice system integrates crime prevention strategies, early intervention with young offenders and diversion away from crime. The importance of recreation and leisure activities especially sport must be recognised".

The Minister of State should check her quotations. I did not say that.

This weekend Deputy Quill called for greater facilities to be made available for young people to keep them away from crime.

I am in the rather unusual position of agreeing with Deputy O'Donnell to some extent. What she said is correct, but it is not enough. An effective justice system requires even earlier intervention — educational intervention at the pre-school stage for children at greatest risk. It also requires numerous subsequent interventions, including those outlined by the Deputy.

Where I part company with Deputy O'Donnell is that I do not suggest all this can be done without public expenditure. The Progressive Democrats' ability to be utterly inconsistent is staggering. Measures which will seriously affect the lives of young people at risk cost money, public money. While it may be possible to find private financiers to build and even run a prison, it is not possible to find private financiers who will invest in the risky and difficult lives about which we are talking. Is Deputy O'Donnell suggesting there is private finance available to invest in educational and social interventions? If not, she should admit the improved services we all want require increased resources.

Is this the same Deputy O'Donnell who recently accused the Labour Party of having a "plot" to favour the disadvantaged? We are not plotting to favour the disadvantaged. We are seriously addressing disadvantage and will continue to do so. We will not indulge in the brazen inconsistency of recognising that disadvantage is a factor in crime and not doing something about it.

Addressing disadvantage requires public expenditure. This is where one has to seriously analyse the Progressive Democrats' position. They promise——

Better value.

——reductions in public expenditure, but they also want a major increase in the justice and many other services. It is not good enough for them to say they will reduce expenditure by better management — how exactly will that be done?

We are committed to improving management in the prisons, to establishing an independent Prisons Board——

There is no evidence of that.

——to ensuring that public money is well spent. Nothing in this Bill will progress these aims. The Progressive Democrats in Government did nothing to bring about institutional reform. The Labour Party in Government has been responsible for the most wide ranging law reform ever. We have established the Criminal Assets Bureau which is successfully spearheading the drive against organised crime. We are bringing about reform of the courts and improving the management and organisation of the Garda. None of this activity is cheap and we will not delude the electorate into believing it can be done without public resources.

Where will the Progressive Democrats find the public expenditure cutbacks? What will they reduce? Will they eliminate the improvements in education this Government introduced? Will they cut back the health services allocation? They are specific about what they intend to do with welfare — they claim they will increase pensions but do not say how that will be funded. What about education and health? If they are going to reduce public expenditure they must have their eyes on those areas.

I unequivocally support the principle of public expenditure. Conventional private investment rarely takes account of the social costs and returns on a proposal. Public expenditure on education is social investment. The return on that expenditure is not immediately obvious nor is it realisable for a very long time. The money this Government is putting into alleviating educational disadvantage will not show a clear return for at least ten years. Similarly, the resources we are putting into local development will not show a major return for a long time. Will these resources be targeted in the PD attempt to cut back public expenditure? The local development partnerships have a long way to go before achieving their potential, but they have brought hope and a chance for the future. Can Deputy O'Donnell honestly say how her party intends to resource them in the future and at the same time cut public expenditure?

Prisons are a monument to social failure. There are and always will be some failures and we will always need prisons. However, we should see prisons as a last, not a first, resort. We want a justice system which, among other things, ensures that people who are guilty of offences involving violence, particularly with guns, serve their sentences fully. We also want a justice system which does everything possible to keep some young offenders out of jail and divert them to other activities. Certain people, particularly those who commit offences involving weapons, should be kept in jail for a very long time, but others should be kept out of jail. The debate on prisons tends to concentrate on those who should be in prison and ignores those who should not be there.

There are three main aspects to the fight against crime: tackling the causes of crime, having adequate legislation and good organisational structures to deal with crime. Crime is committed by our fellow humans who are products of the society in which we live. That society is not as fair and equal as it should be. While unfairness and inequality are not and should not be regarded as excuses for crime, they are among the causes of crime. The Government has been trying to address the causes of crime through local development and targeting of disadvantaged areas, through improvements in the education services and improved services for drug addicts. These efforts must be extended and enhanced. They do not yield immediate benefits, but they are at least as important as the other elements in the battle against crime.

The Government has seriously tackled educational disadvantage at the early stages through the Breaking the Cycle Programme and other schemes. We now need to follow up on this with a programme which will identify young people at risk of becoming involved in crime and tracking them through the education system. More particularly, we need a system of tracking them if they leave the system. A reorganised and resourced school attendance service could provide the basis for a much more comprehensive service which would not simply police attendance at school but would provide a range of options for those who do not continue at school. These options could include providing sports facilities, training and education in less academic subjects and, in general, providing interesting activities which would divert young people away from crime and drugs. In my constituency, the principals of many primary schools could point out children in senior infants who are most at risk of subsequently becoming involved in crime. We need a strategy to keep those children from getting into the prison system just as much as we need one to imprison for long periods those who commit serious crime.

The Progressive Democrats are not serious about tackling the causes of crime unless they admit that it will cost public money and are prepared to devote that to it. Neither are they serious about having adequate legislation to deal with crime — if this Bill is their idea of good legislation, they have a major problem. Good legislation requires quality not quantity and it requires resources to implement. We can introduce any amount of legislation. Without the resources to back it up this legislation is a waste of time. The Child Care Act, fine and necessary legislation, was passed during the Progressive Democrats time in Government. However, it lay unimplemented because of lack of resources until after they went out of office.

The Bill before us today is neither fine nor necessary legislation, it is a shabby piece of work. It includes unnecessary provisions which purport to give powers to the Minister for Justice which already exist. We do not need new legislation to build prisons, the power is already there. We need legislation to set up a prisons board, but this Bill does not include the basic requirements for the establishment of such a board. It includes a number of provisions which are already in the Children Bill and the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. It is an attempt to give the impression that the Progressive Democrats have solutions to problems when what they are proposing is superficial in the extreme. It is an example of the Progressive Democrats doing what they do best, getting publicity for prescribing solutions but not recognising that resources are needed to implement them.

Earlier, Deputy Callely proposed an amendment to this Bill to ban the Beano and Dandy. Many prisoners in our prison system are illiterate and I would have thought the Deputy, as a member of Fianna Fáil, would recognise and acknowledge the need to encourage prisoners during their time in prison to learn to read and write.

This debate is taking place at a good time in the history of this country when there is widespread media coverage of crime and the lack of solutions to the problem. I commend television programmes on crime and prisons. I watched a very good programme last night on Mountjoy Prison. I support the openness with which those programmes are presented on RTÉ. As I watched last night's programme I understood how convoluted and complicated is the whole question of crime and drugs in society. One thing I learned from the programme is that this is a bad Bill. It is a "flash Harry" solution to the problem of crime in society. There is no quick fix, no magic panacea, no simple solution to the problem.

In recent months the Progressive Democrats have tested the intelligence of the people, which is foolish. The people are very intelligent and resourceful and the introduction of a Bill such as this will fool nobody. It is not an answer to the crime problem. If draconian measures helped to solve crime, it would have been solved long ago in America and Australia by means of slavery. I cannot understand how the Progressive Democrats support draconian measures to double the prison population on the one hand while, on the other, they propose to cut expenditure by half. The problem of crime will not be solved in that way.

The Progressive Democrats believe they are sending a message to the electorate, but the public will see through it. For the past few months the Progressive Democrats have highlighted the shortcomings and flaws in our penal system. They drew attention to the earnings of prison officers, some of whom, they claim, receive as much as £700 per week, and to large overtime claims by prison officers. They also criticised the high rate of absenteeism. I do not know how valid are the Progressive Democrats' claims, which should be viewed in a dispassionate way.

I am not a spokesperson or apologist for prison officers. I have been a trade unionist all my life and I am here, first and foremost, as a public representative. If there are faults in the prison system they should be addressed by the Minister. If the amount of overtime worked in prisons is excessive, it should be adjusted fairly, and I would be the first to support the Minister in that regard. Similarly, if there is a high rate of absenteeism among prison officers that should be reviewed, but if the claim is false or spurious, it should be withdrawn.

People often say that because a prison officer's job is dangerous, difficult and stressful one expects a certain level of absenteeism. I understand their conditions may be such that prison officers find it difficult to survive and want time off. However, how does one reconcile that with the high level of overtime worked? I presume that if the conditions are stressful for one group of prison officers, they will be stressful for another. Yet some prison officers seem to work a lot of overtime to increase their earnings. Perhaps the Minister could tell us if the high level of overtime in our prisons is related to the high rate of absenteeism.

The Progressive Democrats also hinted at privatising our prisons. However, the British experience was unsuccessful; it had many faults and it was uneconomical. It is naive and simplistic to say we should privatise the prison system because it would solve all our problems. That is like putting the cart before the horse. Who would operate the system? There are many private security firms and some of them are less than adequate. People without any qualifications or a professional background in security procedures, or regulations to govern their operation, could set themselves up as a security company. We have seen former criminals set up companies, some of which are still in operation. I would be less than happy to see such people running our prison system.

If we want to tackle the problem of crime in our society, we must look at its root causes. I could name 20 different areas in Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford where 90 per cent of our criminals come from. I could name two communities in Limerick city where most of the people who are involved in crime come from. These people come from deprived backgrounds. We should put money into these communities to rehabilitate them and to give them employment opportunities. We should not praise these people once a year for being law abiding citizens and then ignore them for the rest of the year. We should help them to become involved in the community, in work and in training. We can do that if we have the will.

Evil men must be locked up in any society. People who use violence and who kill people cannot be left in society unless they reform. Drugs are contributing to the increase in crime because people are stealing to feed drug habits. I am not against the idea of building drug units in our prisons. I know some prison governors are against this idea because they claim they run prisons, not hospitals. However, one is related to the other. I urge the Minister to consider this because there should be drug treatment units in prisons, even against the wishes of the governors. Drugs are easily available in prisons. If we want to rehabilitate drug users and criminals, drug treatment units must be set up. Old and new prisons should have such units. We must deal with the root causes of crime and stop the escalating crime levels.

I wish to share my time with Deputy Eamon Walsh.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is that agreed? Agreed.

A couple of nights ago Deputy O'Donoghue outlined on television the number of Bills he has introduced since his party went into Opposition. Why were all those Bills necessary since Fianna Fáil was the main party in Government for seven and a half years? I appreciate that Deputy O'Donoghue and Deputy O'Donnell were not in the Cabinet, but by introducing those Bills Deputy O'Donoghue is admitting that our prison system was in crisis when his party left office. One would think the Minister for Justice, Deputy Owen, or the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Deputy Burton, had created crime. This debate will help to clarify the situation.

The situation in our prison system is serious. We have introduced new laws which mean that people must stay longer in prison whether they are convicted of agricultural offences, drug offences, etc. It is important that people who are brought to justice serve a reasonable amount of time. There are four problems in our prison system with which this Government and the Minister are dealing — the need for extra places, the cost of funding those places, the revolving door syndrome and the need for proper rehabilitation.

The Progressive Democrats have introduced this Bill at a sensitive time. A few days ago £23 million was pulled out of the hat to solve the problems associated with the rural group water schemes. Those who do such things should be sure of the facts. We should have learned our lesson after 1977 when this country was thrown into disarray as a result of give-away budgets. We must have the money first before we provide it for group water schemes, prisons, etc.. The Government and the Minister have prepared plans to create more prison places and socially acceptable accommodation which will not cost the country an arm and a leg.

If we want to improve our prison system, we must ensure that only real criminals are locked up. I welcome the decision by the parents and relatives of a young boy who was killed in an accident in the south recently not to pursue their case to put the young man responsible in prison. This is to be highly commended because there is no doubt the young man deserved to be punished for the crime. However, locking him up in prison was not necessarily the best solution.

We must look at the background of the majority of criminals and we must avoid putting people into prison if possible. I understand that 75 per cent of crime is committed in areas where 75 per cent of the population is unemployed. That means we must tackle the problem of long-term unemployment, as this Government is doing. There is a need for more prison places and the Government will, in time, provide all the places needed.

This debate is timely in that it allows us to focus on the important issue of prison reform. We should pay tribute to RTÉ for producing an enlightening series of programmes about our largest prison, Mountjoy, which I visited with Deputies O'Donnell and O'Donoghue and others. We learned much about the many aspects of prison life. We were brought to the basement to look at the padded cell which was occupied by a young man who was about 19 years old and covered in a blanket. He was huddled in a corner. I could see nothing in his eyes, neither personality nor any aspirations for the future. I am sure when he was born everybody had high hopes for him and that when he was in school somebody said at some stage that, despite the circumstances in which he may find himself, he had a future but somewhere along the way, at which point intervention by the State was required, something went wrong. We should target resources to prevent young vulnerable people falling victims to crime and finding themselves in such tragic circumstances.

This is not the time to introduce a Bill such as is before us. We need the maximum number of secure places to keep people off the street in a society where drugs and unemployment are causing severe problems leading to crime. Cost reductions should not be the criterion to use in such a crisis. I am sure Deputy O'Donoghue would agree that we need to maximise the number of secure places available until such time as we get to grips with the drugs problem.

Would it be possible to hold court hearings in secure areas within the boundaries of Mountjoy Prison? This would obviate the need to bring prisoners to courts in the centre of the city and help to reduce costs. Court hearings should also be held in Portlaoise Prison, the cavalcades from which race through my constituency bringing prisoners to courts in Dublin. The Minister should consider those two practical suggestions from the point of view of cost effectiveness. At a later date when we have got to grips with the crime problem we should consider in an objective way the way our prisons are run. It would be dangerous in the meantime to start tampering with what is already in place. We need the maximum number of secure places for those who offend against the community.

This is an excellent Bill in every respect. In normal circumstances, with right-minded Members, it is the kind of Bill that would command support across the floor and would not be the subject of a vote, as I suspect it will be tomorrow evening. We should not divide on an issue as important as this. The Bill aims to put in place, as we approach the turn of the century, a modern, efficient and cost effective prison system.

The Minister of State, Deputy Burton, mentioned that over the weekend I called for facilities for young people to keep them away from crime. There are few Members who would have a greater right to make such a call than I. When the Progressive Democrats were in Government with Fianna Fáil from 1989-92 I was chairperson of the Select Committee on Crime. It produced a report on juvenile crime and justice which laid the foundation for the Children Bill currently before the House. It identified the provision of facilities for young people to divert them away from crime as its priority.

On a point of order, I welcomed what the Deputy said. I also said, however, that public money would have to be provided. For some time the Progressive Democrats have been in favour of massive cuts in public expenditure.

The Minister of State's answer to everything is to spend billions of pounds of taxpayers' money. This is misguided.

I welcomed what the Deputy said.

It is not the Minister of State's money.

The Minister of State had her opportunity and I would appreciate if she would allow me to proceed. The art of politics is to identify where money ought to be spent, where money can be saved, and which items should be given priority so that we get value for money. That is good government. If the Minister of State, or any member of her party, thinks that the taxpayer and the victims of crime are getting good value for the money spent on our prisons, their arithmetic is faulty. We spend £120 million per year or £2 million per week on the prison service. One would imagine, therefore, that we have the most efficient prison service in Europe, if not the world, but by any standard we have the least efficient. This is of grave concern to the taxpayer who is putting up the money. There is an obligation on all of us to ensure taxpayers get a fair return and they, and the community in general, get good value for the money they invest. If there is one public institution more than any other from which good value is not forthcoming it is the prison service. We get good value for the most part for the money we spend on education and we get a fair return for the money spent on health although it could be better, but we get the worst possible return for the money spent on prisons, and that is really the nucleus of this Bill by the Progressive Democrats.

I compliment Deputy O'Donnell for drafting it and for all the time, energy and conscientious work she has put into putting it before the House. Right thinking people of all parties ought to support this Bill because it is the only way forward. We cannot go into the next century keeping in place the institutions which have failed us so lamentably, and no institutions have failed us more than the prisons.

The comparative estimated annual cost of keeping one prisoner is £13,000 in New Zealand, £13,500 in France, £19,000 in Luxembourg, £26,000 in Finland, £28,000 in Italy, £22,000 in Britain, £36,000 in Norway and £45,000 in Ireland so who can defend the argument that there is a cost effective prison system in Ireland? For that amount of money one would truly think we had a deluxe prison system in which every prisoner served his or her full sentence and from which every prisoner emerged fully rehabilitated and returned to the community as a law abiding citizen. Is that the case? Certainly not, so it is about time we subjected the whole system to the kind of evaluation to which the Progressive Democrats have subjected it in the context of this Bill and a number of contributions to this House on the prison service in recent years because we cannot even begin to attempt to address the crime problem unless we begin to address the prison system and the courts and establish proper crime prevention measures in the community.

There has been an explosion of crime. In the past five years serious crime has increased by 52 per cent. There were 11,023 indictable offences in Cork city in 1995, the last year for which figures are available. That tells another story. We are well into the middle of the second month of 1997 and the figures for 1996 are not yet available. That is most inefficient.

Twelve murders were committed in Munster in 1996. Another grim fact is that crime and the fear of crime has paralysed members of the community, particularly the very young and the elderly. Elderly people living alone live in fear of crime and that is almost as bad as crime itself in certain cases.

The real question is that the criminal justice system has not kept pace with that rapid increase in criminal activity. The system is creaking and is almost at the point of breaking down. We, in the Progressive Democrats, say it is high time for a radical root and branch reform of the criminal justice system because the current position is unsustainable. It has reached the point where in the majority of cases the criminal goes unpunished and the victim goes uncompensated. Indeed, if one feature of Irish life stands out today more than any other, it is that crime pays and pays handsomely. I speak not just about the crime which gets headlines but also of white collar crime. As long as crime continues to pay, it will flourish.

A sad feature of crime is the number of people who get caught up in it at a very early age and who run the risk of spending their lives in a jungle of crime. The number of very young inmates in the prison system saddens me more than anything else. I am deeply disappointed that the so-called Children Bill, which I would call the juvenile justice Bill, is only now being brought before the House in the dying days of this Government. Clearly, it will be left to the next Government to resource that Bill and implement its provisions. That is a sad indictment of the priorities of this Government, particularly when one considers that the work was done by the all-party committee of the Progressive Democrats-Fianna Fáil Government of 1992 which was quite prepared to proceed with that Bill. Unfortunately, the Government fell and it was left to the succeeding Government to take it over. It is only now, when this Government is on its deathbed, that it is beginning to see the need for that Bill.

The Progressive Democrats intend to tackle the criminal justice system and reform all its elements but a start must be made with prison reform. The current position in the operation of the prison service has undermined the integrity of the criminal justice system. The revolving door system has had a catastrophic impact on the authority of the courts, the morale of the Garda and the confidence of the general public in the criminal justice system. Gardaí go to great trouble, often almost to the point of putting their lives at risk, to bring suspects before the courts to secure a conviction. In addition, judges hand down sentences in accordance with the laws we make in this House. What happens after that? The sentences are seldom, if ever, served fully. In most cases, only a minimal effort is made to have those sentences served. This revolving door, which is a prominent feature of the prison system, makes a mockery of the judgments of the courts and the efforts of the Garda.

We, as legislators, cannot go to the courts with any justification and say we want a modern sentencing policy unless and until we are prepared to establish a prison system which delivers the sentences handed down by the courts. That is why we, in the Progressive Democrats, put prison reform on top of our agenda to reform the justice system. We must work from there. When we put in place this reformed prison system, provide additional prison places as we indicated in the context of this Bill and ensure prisoners serve their sentences as handed down by the courts, we can legitimately go to the courts and say we think it is about time we had a different, modern and more responsive sentencing policy. We are poorly placed to ask the courts to do that unless and until we have a reformed prison system in place and provide additional places.

For most prisoners prison, with its revolving door, has become a place of respite between crime sprees. Offenders go on a crime spree and are brought before the courts. They know from their pals and from what they see around them that they will only serve a fraction of their sentence, but they are prepared to serve it in the knowledge that they will be released in a short time and will be able to go on another crime spree. That is a salient feature of our courts system.

Some people think our prison system does not need to be radically overhauled or that there should be a root and branch reform. We cannot consider reform while there is a lack of prison spaces. Nobody could be asked to put in place better procedures in our prisons where chronic overcrowding is a feature.

A teacher would say that she could not possibly teach a class of 78 pupils, but she might be able to make some headway with a class of 30 pupils. The same principle applies to prison wardens. They are the subject of a good deal of criticism at times, not without some justification. No prison warden could enjoy working in the cramped and crowded conditions that are a feature of all our prisons.

Cork Prison, in my constituency, is sizeable and was built to house 172 prisoners. I spoke to its governor this morning and asked him how many prisoners were in the prison today. He said it was not so bad today, that often it had been much worse. There are 272 prisoners in the prison. Before we begin to put a proper package of prison reform in place, the number of prison places must be doubled. The Progressive Democrats argued for that in this Bill. Moreover, it pointed out that the business of building prisons must be given to the private sector because it is capable of providing a proper, purpose built prison in a fraction of the time it would take the State to build one. We cannot afford to wait any longer. The current process is too slow and costly.

Every week when I travel from Cork to this House I pass Bewley's Hotel at Newland's Cross. Two years ago the site on which it is built was a green field. That hotel was built in six months. It is possible to build a fine hotel in that time, but it takes three years to build a prison. There is something wrong with that system. Surely after five years in Government certain people, if they have a conscience about this, must be saying they wasted time and they should have done something significant about the prison system.

Why do we have temporary releases? It is because we do not have enough prison places. We must first provide the requisite number of places and then introduce some type of programme that will cater for prisoners' health and welfare and will aim to return prisoners to the community, having served their sentences, as useful and constructive members of society.

The majority of prisoners are under 25 years of age. They have their lives to live. Surely we should consider their prospects. If we have any shred of humanity, we should try to use their prison term to break them away and wean them off a life of crime and point them in the direction of being useful and constructive members of society. Would that cost much more than is being spent at present? I argue it would cost less. We have more than one prison officer for every prisoner. What are they doing? If there was one teacher for every student, we would have a generation of geniuses. If a staff member of a hotel was available to deal with only one guest, one can imagine the rating of that hotel and the number of stars it would be given. There is more than one prison warden for every prisoner but do we have reformed prisoners? Are their health, education and psychological needs met for the duration of their stay in prison? The contrary is the case.

In this Bill we are saying it is possible to put in place a modern, effective prison system that has a sufficient number of places which will enable prisoners to serve their full sentence and benefit, in every sense, from their time there. We also point out that can be done for at least the same amount of money that is being spent on our prison system which is in chaos and is a disgrace and an indictment of all of us.

As well as providing additional places, we must change the management system. We should not continue to put new wine in old bottles. We must put in place an independent management system that will ensure our prisons are run professionally as they need and deserve to be run.

If I had one wish, it would be that in three years' time we would be able to take Mountjoy Prison out of the prison system and put the building to an alternative use. A culture of bad practice, malpractice and drug abuse has grown up around that institution over the years. There comes a time when a society is intelligent and compassionate enough to recognise that a given institution has served its purpose, has no place in a modern democratic society and must be taken out of the system.

Today, I am a TD for ten years. If there is one matter more than any other of which I am proud it is that I was part of a Government that laid the foundations for the juvenile justice Bill. I would like to be able to boast of one other thing when I leave politics — that Mountjoy Prison, with all its associations and sad history, would no longer be used as a prison building but, would be put to another use and that prisoners would be housed in a purpose built modern prison that would serve the needs of this country in a manner in which Mountjoy Prison has not done and will never do. In saying that I am not criticising the staff of Mountjoy Prison or politicians as the problem has developed incrementally.

I appeal to Members to support this Bill and my party's aspiration that Mountjoy Prison should be removed from the control of the Prison Service. That should be done as our gesture towards the new millennium.

Debate adjourned.
Barr
Roinn